Unfortunately, your malfunction becomes increasingly evident the more you post.

Let’s have a definition of ‘malfunction.’

Signature

What do I care for a hell for oppressors? What good can hell do, since those children have already been tortured? And what becomes of harmony, if there is hell? I want to forgive. I want to embrace. I don’t want more suffering. And if the sufferings of children go to swell the sum of sufferings which was necessary to pay for truth, then I protest that the truth is not worth such a price.
-Ivan Karamazov

A person’s behavioral traits (and many physical traits) result from a complex interaction between environment and genetic capacity.

Having an interest in men, fat women, foot fetish, etc. etc. are a result of “who knows what”.

I’m somewhat uncomfortable with the genetic-gayness argument.
It’s seems like we say “it’s in the genes!” as a way of justifying something to religious folks as if there is actually something wrong with being gay.

[quote author=“rogerflat”]. . . Evolution is strictly driven by reproduction. Dying only plays a factor if it prevents a person from reproducing, but in homosexuals that wouldn’t matter anyway because they never reproduce.

Roger, please dissuade yourself if you can from the above mistaken assumption. My own recollected experience is obviously completely unscientific (anecdotal), but it reflects a general reality: Other than forum pals such as CanZen, Rami and others here, I have only two close, life-long (since childhood) friends who are gay that I know of. Between the two of them, they have 5 children. One of them is a student of human nature, has a masters in psychology, and he says that some chicks go nuts for gay guys. He’s a very average-looking person, but has been openly propositioned many more times than me (a handsome devil, of course. At least in my day.)

Roger, can you possibly stop allowing yourself to be baited into pulling up ridiculous arguments out of yourass and return to normal anti-religion fun? Society says it’s not okay to hate any group of people who don’t already hate you. If you are unable to stop hating (or go ahead and choose your preferred synonym for “hating”) gays, at least make the decision to stop publicizing your hate. Pretend you don’t care about the gays. I’m trying to help you here because you used to be a valuable thinker and I miss that. Crawl out of your gay-hating persona. You may just be forgiven by all or at least most of us heathens. Stop talking.

If necessary, take an ativan or valium or drink 2 large glasses of dry Chard and follow it up with a smoked bowl if needed, and reread this post with the resulting clarity. Get over your hetero self. Not everyone is normal as you define it, yet they can be wonderful human creatures. Sexual orientation in my experience has NOTHING to do with a person’s kindness, competence, intelligence or actual normalcy. Nothing. Stop fucking arguing.

Signature

Philosophy may in no way interfere with the actual use of language; it can in the end only describe it. For it cannot give it any foundations either. It leaves everything as it is.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

I have only two close, life-long (since childhood) friends who are gay that I know of. Between the two of them, they have 5 children.

You appear to be suggesting that gays DO indeed reproduce. They can of course, but this is even further evidence that being gay is a choice in some cases. They start off in hetero relationships, have kids, then go the gay route. It’s possible that in those circumstances there are reasons other than genetics and molestation that compel them to be gay.

I have yet another story from today about my experience with a gay person. The man who sits next to me is gay. Ironically I am cool with him despite my indifference toward homosexuality. Anyway, he was telling me about this obese man who used to work with us who was also gay. He said that the guy sent him an email which read “I’m not sure if I like guys or girls, but I know I like you. Let’s have dinner sometime.”

Keep in mind that this guy had one of frontal orb lower belly things and was probably the last thing any woman would want a man to look like. So his statement “I don’t know if I like guys or girls” could really be reworded as: “Since girls don’t like me, I think I should try seeing if guys do.” Very sad and disgraceful imho.

This man was later fired for embezellment and is yet another stellar example of a gay man. I keep seeing recurring themes with the homosexuals I know of and most always it is something negative. If this is representative of the homosexual population as a whole then it is very telling.

These examples of sad sack gay men prove no point. The little assumptive voice rogerflat plays for us as if they know what a person is thinking or as if they are able to read minds proves no point and is not productive. Large/ fat men are undesirable to females? John Candy and a million of other large “undesirable” men were married. My own father in law is obese and was married for a long time. Roger, not only are you bigoted toward gays but have a shallow mental furrow as to what type of male is deemed worthy for female companionship. I know you don’t think this way, at least I hope… but it’s like you are saying men who gain a lot of weight should just go out and sever themselves from female companionship since their female companion no longer wants them…. as if there is no other worthy quality left. I don’t get it. It’s nauseating to read. It’s sad.

Did you not even stop for a minute to consider men like george michaels or rock hudson? No, you are right, no woman would ever dream of spreading her legs for george michaels. GM is plainly a disgusting and vile looking man who sends women wretching to the toilets if he ever chose to approach one of them for a relationship. Yet george michaels and the millions of stunningly good looking gay men tried to fit society’s hetero mold for decades, failed to morph into rogerflat’s world view, and finally embraced the sex that they preferred. Oh my gosh… and geroge michaels is even THIN!!!

I have now seen two gay men admit that they do not know if homosexuality is genetic. Roger even admits he does not know. I think the thread could be a candidate for completion now since a consensus has almost been reached in that no one actually knows why some prefer their own sex.

I move to allow rogerflat his bigotry and end this painful to read discussion.

“rogerflat
Even a recessive trait that is not directly passed on, can be weeded out over time if it hinders reproduction. Because the family that passes on no “gay genes” will end up with all four children reproducing whereas the family with the gay member will only have three.

Theoretically, sure. But I don’t see what would prevent two heterozygotes from getting together and making babies. You see, it is the heterosexual heterozygotes that are the carriers of the gay genes. So it is THEIR survival and reproduction that would be the issue. If they keep on reproducing, 25% of their offspring will be homosexual homozygotes. So, even if homosexuals never pass their recessive gay genes on, the heterosexual carriers would do the job.

I’m not an expert on genetics so I’m not going to sit here and say that there isn’t some sort of genetic link to homosexuality, because I don’t know for sure.

Well, nobody knows for sure. But there are strong indications that there is a genetic component. Identical twins are genetically identical. When one is gay, there is a 50% chance that the other will be gay too. That likelyhood is much lower with fraternal twins and other siblings. So, there is almost certainly a genetic component to homosexuality. After all, it would be unthinkable that there would be not a genetic component to all sexuality.

But based on the principles of evolution it doesn’t seem that the genetic reasons behind homosexuality would be the drving force.

The driving force for what?

There was also some misunderstanding as to me wagering a moral opinion about homosexuality based on it being a genetic defect.

Honestly, roger, I don’t think that was a misunderstanding. You stated that it was a generic defect and then you stated that there was something wrong about it. Then you went on to say that it could be harmful to the individual. Perhpas you weren’t consciously aware of it, but you were making a moral judgment based on the fact that homosexuality, in your view, seems to defy some natural law which must not be broken.

I don’t like it as a personal choice, but it just so happens it that it may or may not be a genetic defect too. Either way I still, personally, don’t like it, and that is my right.

Well, it is more than your right. You have no choice but to feel the way you do. You don’t like it, fine, you don’t like it. My beef with you is that you are trying to find some kind of cosmic justification for not liking it. And our Christian fundie brethren do the same thing all the time. Let it be enough for you that you don’t like it because you have no taste for it. Nothing wrong with that. You don’t enjoy the thought of two men doing it. Fine. You don’t enjoy the sight of guys camping it up. Fine. But leave it at that. Don’t try to find some grand justification for your feelings—as if they needed justification at all! You are tying to make it sound as if you are justified in not liking homosexuality because, well, it’s just a natural defect, or, because it leads to AIDS, or, because it stems from child molestation. It’s all BS, and you must know that. I wish you would just be honest with yourself, stand up and say to the world “I don’t like gays. They gross me out.” Granted, I still think that it is utterly prejudicial to judge an entire person based on their sexual orientation, but you don’t need to justify the way you honestly feel. If that’s how you feel, that’s how you feel. No justification is necessary.

I understand some of what you guys mean about it being wrong to blame them. Whether it is a result of genetics or molestation, they still don’t have a choice in being gay.

Neither does anyone have a choice in being attracted to whomever they are attracted. Explain this to BC, would you? He might listen to you.

But I’m not Mother Teresa either, and if you are defective and doing something I don’t like, I’ll just take it at face value and tell you I don’t like you.

So you don’t like me because I have sex with a man? I think it is an awfully bigoted position to take. How can you judge the entirety of my personal worth when you are basing your evaluation on one tiny part of who I am, and a part that does not concern you in the least (since I have no intention of having sex with you, not even cyber-sex, not even if you beg :wink: ).

If you don’t like the idea of men having sex with men, don’t have sex with men. What’s it to you what I do with my penis in private? Do you see me making pronouncements on your worth as a person based on who you are sleeping with?

Your malfunction is your problem, not mine.

Now, roger, come on. I wasn’t born yesterday. You don’t dislike me because you think I have a biological malfunction. You dislike me because you find the idea of two men doing it distasteful. All of your rhetoric is a desperate and vain attempt at finding a logical justification for your personal attitude. I am telling you, you don’t need one. Nobody says you have to love gays or homosexuality. You can find the thought of two men doing it repulsive. It’s OK. You cant help it. That’s who you feel. But you are trying to make it sound as if the way you feel is the only natural way to feel - because there is something naturally - OBJECTIVELY - replusive about homosexuality.

Your subjective opinion is your subjective opinion. Quit trying to make it an objective fact.

I was “born gay” (and 100% gay - a Kinsey 6), with a relatively normal molestation-free childhood in suburbia.

My homosexual feelings (and there were many many pre-sexual “sexual attractions” as early as 3 or 4) felt to me as natural as can be; I’m sure exactlly like heteros feel toward the oppostie sex. However, the message was (and apparently still is): “you’re not right.” Allowed to be who I was, I might have dated as a teenager, maybe met that special someone in my 20s or 30s, started a life. But that couldn’t happen becaue I had to suppress my attraction for fear of abandonment, physical harm, ostracism, you name it. When i came out at 19 (in 1983), lots of damage had been done. I will not get into those details. I’m a functioning member of society working on a Ph.D., with some great friends (tolerant and progressive friends). I’m such a romantic - I still want very deeply that idealized life with my one-and-only.

Many of you probably have felt the effects of prejudice in one form or another. I think that lots of inroads have been made toward erasing lots of racism and sexism (not all the way, but lots). Homosexuality is still being debated.

Some gay people are cynical - it’s hard not to be. But being exposed to scientists, politicians, religious clergy debating about whether you are “acceptable”, whether you’re “normal”, whether you’re nature or nurture, whether you should have the same rights as everyone else, whether you can be “cured”, actually debating your worth because you’re homosexual - I can’t describe how much that hurts, even when I roll my eyes, even when I remind myself that we’ve still come a long way, even when I remember all the people who are my friends and family and who love me.

Homosexuality has been around since humankind, in every part of the world. It has never proven harmful. It is a fact, a biological phenomenon, not a choice.

A person’s behavioral traits (and many physical traits) result from a complex interaction between environment and genetic capacity.

Having an interest in men, fat women, foot fetish, etc. etc. are a result of “who knows what”.

I’m somewhat uncomfortable with the genetic-gayness argument.
It’s seems like we say “it’s in the genes!” as a way of justifying something to religious folks as if there is actually something wrong with being gay.

\

People Biology is messy. It’s that simple. Evolution would not be possible if biology were not so messy. Is it not a fact. that a certain percentage of any given population, any time any country is gay. Is it not a fact that the percentage is almost the same in almost any given population. If so, than what are we arguing about. It’s been that way since the beginning. It will always be this way. Gay people exist and they had to evolve this way. What other choices are there ......God created them? Grow up and get over it. So we can allow these people to have a life similar to the ones we enjoy.

I’m an atheist but I don’t think people are born gay. People are just predisposed to making bad choices in life. It’s all part of being human. It would be like saying some people are born to go to prison. Or born to be drug addicts.

Maybe its the whole nature vs. nurture debate. But I feel it is mainly people’s environments/upbringings which cause them to go a certain way in life. The harsh reality is that most, if not all, homosexuals are molested as children.

Especially in light of Dateline’s “To catch a predator” expose’, it is clear how pervasive child sexual predation is nowadays. I don’t have any problems with gays and I understand how you could be made into one if traumatized as a youth. However, this “born gay” myth has to go.

Have you ever seen a little kid that you new for a fact was going to grow up gay? How could that child be predisposed, Its not a choice, There are people that destroy there entire social structure, loose there job, betrayed by love ones just because of a TRAMATIZED YOUTH. You are naive.